Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Demogorgon (Dungeons & Dragons)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Demogorgon. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:05, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Demogorgon (Dungeons & Dragons)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fictional character. No evidence of stand-alone notability. Not a shred of analysis. Pure WP:PLOT and list of appearances in media. Fails WP:PLOT, WP:GNG, WP:NFICTION. BEFORE shows nothing that's not in passing or a plot summary. Deprodded by User:Necrothesp with no rationale. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:35, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:35, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fantasy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or at worst fully merge to List of demon lords in Dungeons & Dragons. Deleting information serves no useful purpose even if a standalone article is not kept. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:01, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or at worst merge to List of demon lords in Dungeons & Dragons per above. BOZ (talk) 15:37, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable fancruft that fails WP:GNG. There is no merge target that isn't also failing WP:LISTN._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:54, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'll point out that the first two keep votes contain no valid rationale. AfD WP:ITSNOTAVOTE, please. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Demogorgon, the article on the supposed mythological figure that it is named after. That article could use some work at organizing the information a bit better, but the D&D version is already mentioned there as a depiction of it in later works. While the non-primary sourcing on this isn't the greatest, the fact that Stranger Things popularized the creature's name probably warrants it having some brief information and redirect there as a likely search. Rorshacma (talk) 16:58, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
keep or full merge Demogorgon article (not the list). Stranger Things among other recent appearances confer significant coverage and notability on the specific D&D Demogorgon. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 23:36, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Current sourcing fails GNG. The appearance in ST would most likely amount to little in terms of significant coverage in sources, so I don't think that holds much promise of improvement. TTN (talk) 00:01, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Demogorgon. I've said it before: I think some of these articles would be better served as add-ons to articles for the original mythological creatures, with something like a modern interpretations or representations section. I can only find passing mentions of the creature in independent source books like Dungeons & Dragons: Art and Arcana. The Stranger Things connection definitely boosts notability a bit, but perhaps not enough for a standalone. The discussion in Uncovering Stranger Things (see "Monsters and Moral Panics" starting on page 60, especially pages 63–64) is a little meatier, but it's still not quite enough. I think it would be a good addition to a D&D section in the main article though. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 13:45, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
comment added another citation for the physical description of the specific D&D Demogorgon to the article. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 10:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fictional. Not a shred of analysis. Pure PLOT. Fails GNG and NFICTION.Kacper IV (talk) 11:58, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.